chunk_id
stringlengths 3
8
| chunk
stringlengths 1
1k
|
|---|---|
1964_24 | Tactics
PVA forces used rapid attacks on the flanks and rear and infiltration behind UN lines to give the appearance of vast hordes. This, of course, was augmented by the PVA tactic of maximizing their forces for the attack, ensuring a large local numerical superiority over their opponent. The initial PVA victories were a great morale booster for the PVA. However, by late 1951, overextended supply lines and superior UN firepower had forced a stalemate. The KPA that invaded in 1950 had been much better supplied and armed by the Soviets than the PVA had been. The main arms of the PVA were captured Japanese and Nationalist arms.
Historian and Korean War veteran Bevin Alexander had this to say about Chinese tactics in his book How Wars Are Won: |
1964_25 | The Chinese had no air power and were armed only with rifles, machineguns, hand grenades, and mortars. Against the much more heavily armed Americans, they adapted a technique they had used against the Nationalists in the Chinese civil war of 1946–49. The Chinese generally attacked at night and tried to close in on a small troop position—generally a platoon—and then attacked it with local superiority in numbers. The usual method was to infiltrate small units, from a platoon of fifty men to a company of 200, split into separate detachments. While one team cut off the escape route of the Americans, the others struck both the front and the flanks in concerted assaults. The attacks continued on all sides until the defenders were destroyed or forced to withdraw. The Chinese then crept forward to the open flank of the next platoon position, and repeated the tactics. |
1964_26 | Roy Appleman further clarified the initial Chinese tactics as: |
1964_27 | In the First Phase Offensive, highly skilled enemy light infantry troops had carried out the Chinese attacks, generally unaided by any weapons larger than mortars. Their attacks had demonstrated that the Chinese were well-trained disciplined fire fighters, and particularly adept at night fighting. They were masters of the art of camouflage. Their patrols were remarkably successful in locating the positions of the U.N. forces. They planned their attacks to get in the rear of these forces, cut them off from their escape and supply roads, and then send in frontal and flanking attacks to precipitate the battle. They also employed a tactic which they termed Hachi Shiki, which was a V-formation into which they allowed enemy forces to move; the sides of the V then closed around their enemy while another force moved below the mouth of the V to engage any forces attempting to relieve the trapped unit. Such were the tactics the Chinese used with great success at Onjong, Unsan, and Ch'osan, but |
1964_28 | with only partial success at Pakch'on and the Ch'ongch'on bridgehead. |
1964_29 | Discipline and political control
The discipline of the PVA was strict by western standards, a notable improvement when compared to the Nationalist and warlord armies that ruled the country from 1912 until 1949. Discipline was applied universally within the army, with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members expected to be punished more than non-Party soldiers for the same infraction. Beatings and abuses were also forbidden by regulations. Although capital punishments were enforced for disobeying certain orders, it was rarely used in accordance with the Chinese traditions. Normally, public shamings and political indoctrination camps were preferred methods in dealing with serious infractions such as desertion, and the punished are expected to return to frontline duty with his original unit. |
1964_30 | Like the Soviet Army, political and military officers formed a dual chain of command within the PVA, and this arrangement could be found as low as the company level. Political officers were in charge of the control and the morale of the troops, and they were often expected to act like role models in combat. Unlike other Communist armies of the same period, although the political officers had authority over military officers on combat decisions, the military officers could issue orders without political officers' approval. Similarly, the line between military and political officers were often blurred in PVA, since the political officers often had extensive military experiences while most military officers were senior Party members within a unit. |
1964_31 | Besides the political officers, Party members and Party candidates also enforced political controls within the ranks. Squads were often divided into three-man fireteams, with each fireteam led by a Party member or a Party candidate. Group meetings were frequently used to maintain unit cohesion, and within the meetings public shamings and criticisms were conducted to raise morale and to indoctrinate soldiers. |
1964_32 | The by-product of the tight political control within the PVA is that it relied on the presence of the Party members within its ranks to be combat effective. A PVA unit could disintegrate once the Party members were either killed or wounded in action. Also, the tight political control had created a general dissatisfaction amongst the Chinese ranks, and it required constant political indoctrination and high peer pressure to maintain high morale for each soldier.
According to the Korean War written by Matthew Bunker Ridgway, the commander-in-chief of the United Nations forces, the positive evaluation of the Chinese Army's good treatment of prisoners is completely different from the Korean People's Army's policy of abusing prisoners. He positively praised the Chinese army as a disciplined army and a respectable enemy.。During the Korean War, the US front-line combat forces also spoke highly of the fighting will of the Chinese people's Volunteer Army。 |
1964_33 | Prisoners-of-war (POWs)
Prisoners-of-war (POWs) played a major role in the continuation of the war past 1951. The US accused China of implementing mind control, coined "brainwashing", on US prisoners, while China refused to allow the US to repatriate POWs to Taiwan.
United Nations POWs
In contrast with their KPA counterparts, executions committed by the PVA were rather few in number. According to author Kevin Mahoney in his study of the PVA, executions of POWs did occur during the heat of the battle. Most of the executions appeared to have been committed by the lower commands without the upper echelons' knowledge, and it is often carried out to prevent the future escapes or rescues of the POWs. |
1964_34 | Because the PVA rarely executed prisoners, the Chinese considered themselves to be more lenient and humane than the KPA. However, the Chinese were unprepared for the large influx of POWs after their entry into the war and a large number of prisoners were crowded into temporary camps for processing. Mass starvation and diseases soon swept through those camps during the winter of 1950–51, while numerous death marches were conducted by the PVA to move the prisoners into permanent locations. Although the situation started to improve after permanent camps were established by January 1951, death by starvation still continued until April 1951. About 43 percent of all US POWs died from November 1950 to April 1951. In comparison, only 34 percent of all US prisoners died under Japanese captivity during World War II. The Chinese have defended their actions by stating that all PVA soldiers during this period were also suffering mass starvation and diseases due to the lack of a competent logistics |
1964_35 | system. The UN POWs, however, pointed out that a lot of the Chinese camps were located near the Sino-Korean border, and claimed that the starvation was used to force the prisoners to accept the communism indoctrinations programs. The starvation and the POW deaths finally stopped by the summer of 1951 after the armistice talks started. |
1964_36 | Allegations of mind control
During the Korean War, Edward Hunter, who worked at the time both as a journalist and as a U.S. intelligence agent, wrote a series of books and articles on the allegations of Chinese mind control, which he coined as "brainwashing". |
1964_37 | The Chinese term 洗腦 (xǐ năo, literally "wash brain") was originally used to describe methodologies of coercive persuasion used under the Maoist regime in China, which aimed to transform individuals with a reactionary imperialist mindset into "right-thinking" members of the new Chinese social system. To that end the regime developed techniques that would break down the psyche integrity of the individual with regard to information processing, information retained in the mind and individual values. Chosen techniques included dehumanizing of individuals by keeping them in filth, sleep deprivation, partial sensory deprivation, psychological harassment, inculcation of guilt and group social pressure. The term punned on the Taoist custom of "cleansing/washing the heart" (洗心, xǐ xīn) prior to conducting certain ceremonies or entering certain holy places. |
1964_38 | Hunter and those who picked up the Chinese term used it to explain why, unlike in earlier wars, a relatively high percentage of American GIs defected to the enemy side after becoming prisoners-of-war. It was believed that the Chinese in North Korea used such techniques to disrupt the ability of captured troops to effectively organize and resist their imprisonment. British radio operator Robert W. Ford and British army Colonel James Carne also claimed that the Chinese subjected them to brainwashing techniques during their war-era imprisonment. |
1964_39 | After the war, two studies of the repatriation of American prisoners of war by Robert Lifton and by Edgar Schein concluded that brainwashing (called "thought reform" by Lifton and "coercive persuasion" by Schein) had a transient effect. Both researchers found that the Chinese mainly used coercive persuasion to disrupt the ability of the prisoners to organize and maintain morale and hence to escape. By placing the prisoners under conditions of physical and social deprivation and disruption, and then by offering them more comfortable situations such as better sleeping quarters, better food, warmer clothes or blankets, the Chinese did succeed in getting some of the prisoners to make anti-American statements. Nevertheless, the majority of prisoners did not actually adopt Communist beliefs, instead behaving as though they did in order to avoid the plausible threat of extreme physical abuse. Both researchers also concluded that such coercive persuasion succeeded only on a minority of POWs, |
1964_40 | and that the end-result of such coercion remained very unstable, as most of the individuals reverted to their previous condition soon after they left the coercive environment. In 1961 they both published books expanding on these findings. Schein published Coercive Persuasion and Lifton published Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism. More recent writers including Mikhail Heller have suggested that Lifton's model of brainwashing may throw light on the use of mass propaganda in other communist states such as the former Soviet Union. |
1964_41 | In a summary published in 1963, Edgar Schein gave a background history of the precursor origins of the brainwashing phenomenon:
Thought reform contains elements which are evident in Chinese culture (emphasis on interpersonal sensitivity, learning by rote and self-cultivation); in methods of extracting confessions well known in the Papal Inquisition (13th century) and elaborated through the centuries, especially by the Russian secret police; in methods of organizing corrective prisons, mental hospitals and other institutions for producing value change; in methods used by religious sects, fraternal orders, political elites or primitive societies for converting or initiating new members. Thought reform techniques are consistent with psychological principles but were not explicitly derived from such principles. |
1964_42 | Mind-control theories from the Korean War era came under criticism in subsequent years. According to forensic psychologist Dick Anthony, the CIA invented the concept of "brainwashing" as a propaganda strategy to undercut communist claims that American POWs in Korean communist camps had voluntarily expressed sympathy for communism. Anthony stated that definitive research demonstrated that fear and duress, not brainwashing, caused western POWs to collaborate. He argued that the books of Hunter (whom he identified as a secret CIA "psychological warfare specialist" passing as a journalist) pushed the CIA brainwashing theory onto the general public. |
1964_43 | In addition, Herbert Brownell Jr., the Attorney General of the United States, once said publicly that "if American prisoners of war cooperate with the Communist Party during their imprisonment in North Korea, they will face charges of treason that may carry out the death penalty. Moreover, the United States official wrote a statement saying: "Those who cooperate with Communists and sign false confessions should be quickly removed from the army, not honored." in addition to the threats and pressure made by the U.S. government and military, prisoners of war also bear great psychological pressure that shames their families. This is considered to be that many American prisoners of war accuse "China of abusing prisoners of war" Or the reason for overturning his previous statement in favor of the people's Republic of China after returning home.
Chinese POWs |
1964_44 | Anti-Communist POWs in Communist service |
1964_45 | During the Panmunjom Truce negotiations, the chief stumbling block to the arrangement of a final armistice during the winter of 1951–1952 revolved around the exchange of prisoners. At first glance, there appeared to be nothing to argue about, since the Geneva Conventions of 1949, by which both sides had pledged to abide, called for the immediate and complete exchange of all prisoners upon the conclusion of hostilities. This seemingly straightforward principle, however, disturbed many Americans. To begin with, UN prisoner-of-war camps held over 40,000 South Koreans, many of whom had been impressed into Communist service and who had no desire to be sent north upon the conclusion of the war. Moreover, a considerable number of North Korean and Chinese prisoners had also expressed a desire not to return to their homelands. This was particularly true of the Chinese POWs, some of whom were anti-Communists whom the Communists had forcibly inducted during the Chinese Civil War into the PLA |
1964_46 | unit that was later transferred into Korea. |
1964_47 | Aftermath of the Korean War
In 2011, some former members of the PVA revisited North Korea. After the visit, they commented that they were "very sad" and dissatisfied with the post-war development of North Korea. "[We] liberated them, but they're still struggling for freedom" said Qu Yingkui.
To mark the 70th year of entry into the Korean War by the volunteers' army, Kim Jong-un visited the cemetery in 2020. The Pyongyang Times described the soldiers as having 'unparalleled bravery, mass spirit and international heroism,' and describing the other help that the volunteer army provided.
Early Chinese involvement |
1964_48 | The stated historical importance of the PVA entering the war was that it marked the beginning of Chinese government involvement. However, this is rather from political propaganda needs and there is debate of the time of the beginning of Chinese involvement. Some scholars in the west had argued that the Chinese involvement was much earlier, and in the North Korean invasion on June 25, 1950, out of the 135,000 KPA invasion force, more than 38,000 were former ethnic Korean soldiers of the Chinese Communist Fourth Field Army. An equal number of former ethnic Korean soldiers of Fourth Field Army who did not participate in the invasion also served in the KPA in other regions of North Korea. The KPA invasion force consisted of two corps, the I Corps and II Corps. Jin Xiong (金雄, Kim Woong), the commander-in-chief of the invasion force and the commander of KPA I Corps, was a veteran of Eighth Route Army, and a former member of the CCP. Jin Wuting (金武亭, Kim Mu Jong), also known as Wu Ting (武亭, |
1964_49 | Mu Jong) the commander of KPA II Corps, even had more seniority than Jin Xiong (金雄), in that he participated in Guangzhou Uprising and the Long March. All of these facts are agreed by the Chinese government. |
1964_50 | The former units of the Fourth Field Army transferred to North Korean with all of their weapons were: |
1964_51 | 5th Division (North Korea): former 164th Division. The commander, Li Deshan (李德山), a veteran of Eighth Route Army and former member of the CCP, was also the political commissar. When the division reached to North Korea on July 20, 1949, its number totaled 10,821. Weaponry brought with them included 5,279 rifles, 588 handguns, 321 light machine guns, 104 heavy machine guns, 206 submachine guns, 8 anti-tank rifles, 32 grenade launchers, 67 50-mm mortars, 87 60-mm mortars, 26 mortars with calibre of 81-mm or greater, 12 anti-tank guns, 1 infantry support gun, 3 other artillery pieces and 734 horses. |
1964_52 | 6th Division (North Korea): former 166th Division. The commander, Fang Hushan (方虎山, Bang Ho San), a veteran of Eighth Route Army and former member of the CCP, was also the political commissar. When the division reached to North Korea on July 20, 1949, its number totaled 10,320. Weaponry brought with them included: 6,046 rifles, 722 handguns, 281 light machine guns, 91 heavy machine guns, 878 submachine guns, 69 grenade launchers, 31 50-mm mortars, 91 60-mm mortars, 33 mortars with calibre of 81-mm or greater, 10 anti-tank guns, 3 mountain guns, 3 other artillery pieces and 945 horses. |
1964_53 | 7th Division (North Korea) (later renamed as the 12th): former 156th Division, with additional ethnic Korean soldiers from the 139th, 140th and 141st Divisions of the IV Field Army. The commander, Cui Ren (崔仁, Chu Yol), a veteran of Eighth Route Army and former member of the CCP, was also the political commissar. When the division reached North Korea on April 18, 1950, its number totaled more than 14,000. The weaponry brought into North Korea was greater than that of the other two divisions due to its larger size. |
1964_54 | With the exception of the KPA 2nd and 3rd Divisions, which mostly consisted of former-Soviet trained North Korean troops, all other KPA divisions had at least a former regiment of the IV Field Army, and in addition to the three former Chinese divisions, most of commanders were former commanders of the IV Field army, such as:
Commander of the 2nd Division Ch'oe Hyon (崔贤) and chief-of-staff Xu Bo (许波)
Commander of the 3rd Division Lee Yong Ho (李英镝) and chief-of-staff Zhang Pingshan (张平山)
Commander of the 4th Division Lee Kwon Mu (李权武) |
1964_55 | Though the Chinese government acknowledged these facts, this early Chinese involvement was kept a secret for more than four decades in China and it was only until the late 1990s when such information was finally allowed to be revealed on large scale. The Chinese government, however, argued that these troops were already transferred to North Korea and thus should be strictly considered as the internal affairs of Korea, and thus still asserts the Chinese involvement in the Korean War began when the PVA joined the fight.
Legacy
Democratic People's Republic of Korea
The legacy of the PVA is commemorated in the DPRK with the Cemetery of the Fallen Soldiers of the Chinese People’s Volunteers Army, located in Hoechang County. Wreaths and floral baskets are sent to commemorate their contributions to the war. |
1964_56 | People's Republic of China
For many Chinese, the Korean War is generally regarded as an honorable struggle in Chinese history. The PVA was the first Chinese army in a century that was able to withstand a Western army in a major conflict. They had earned a name "the most beloved people (最可爱的人)", which is from the essay written by Wei Wei in 1951, "Who are the Most Beloved People?". More and more stories of heroism by members of the PVA continue to be promoted by the PRC government even to this day, and appear in school textbooks. The willingness of China to assist North Korea against the United States, and the show of force they engaged in, heralded that China was once again becoming a major world power. |
1964_57 | From official Chinese sources, PVA casualties during the Korean War were 390,000. This breaks down as follows: 110,400 KIA; 21,600 died of wounds; 13,000 died of sickness; 25,600 MIA/POW; and 260,000 more wounded. However, western and other sources estimate that about 400,000 Chinese soldiers were either killed in action or died of disease, starvation, exposure, and accidents with around 486,000 wounded, out of around 3 million military personnel deployed in the war by China. Mao Zedong's oldest and only healthy son, Mao Anying (毛岸英), was a PVA officer during the war, and was killed by a UN air strike.
The war also contributed to the decline of Sino-Soviet relations. Although Chinese had their own reasons to enter the war (i.e. a strategic buffer zone in the Korean peninsula), the view that the Soviets had used them as proxies was shared in the Western bloc. China had to use Soviet loans originally intended to rebuild their shattered economy to pay for Soviet arms. |
1964_58 | Republic of China
After the war was over, of the PVA POWs held by UNC forces, 14,235 were transported to Taiwan. The began arriving in Taiwan on January 23, 1954 and were referred to as "Anti-Communist Martyrs" (反共義士). In Taiwan January 23 became World Freedom Day (自由日) in their honor. |
1964_59 | The Korean War also led to other long-lasting effects. Until the war, the US had largely abandoned the government of Chiang Kai-shek, which had retreated to Taiwan, and had no plans to intervene in the Chinese Civil War. The start of the Korean War rendered untenable any policy that would have caused Taiwan to fall under PRC control. Truman's decision to send American forces to the Taiwan Strait further deterred the PRC from making any cross-strait invasion of Taiwan. The anti-communist atmosphere in the West in response to the Korean War and Cold War contributed to the unwillingness to diplomatically recognize the People's Republic of China by the United States until 1979. Today, diplomacy between the Republic of China and mainland China remains strained, and mainland China continues to claim the sovereignty of Taiwan.
Media |
1964_60 | Who are the Most Beloved People? () is the title of an essay by Chinese writer Wei Wei about the Chinese soldiers serving in the Korean War. It is considered to be the most famous literary and propaganda piece produced by China during the Korean War.
Battle on Shangganling Mountain () is a famous Chinese war movie about the Battle of Triangle Hill. The story is centered around a group of Chinese soldiers that were trapped in a tunnel for several days. Short of both food and water, they hold their grounds till the relief troops arrive. The movie's popularity is largely due to the fact it was one of the few movies that were not banned during the Cultural Revolution. |
1964_61 | War Trash is a novel by the Chinese author Ha Jin, who has long lived in the United States and who writes in English. It takes the form of a memoir written by the fictional character Yu Yuan, a man who eventually becomes a soldier in the Chinese People's Volunteer Army and who is sent to Korea to fight on the Communist side in the Korean War. The majority of the "memoir" is devoted to describing this experience, especially after Yu Yuan is captured and imprisoned as a POW. The novel captured the PEN/Faulkner Award and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.
See also
Cold War
People's Liberation Army
Korean War
Notes
References
Citations
Sources
part 2
China
Expatriate units and formations
Expeditionary units and formations
Military units and formations established in 1950
Military units and formations disestablished in 1994 |
1965_0 | The Hire More Heroes Act of 2013 () is a bill that would allow employers to exclude veterans receiving health insurance from the United States Department of Defense or the United States Department of Veterans' Affairs from their list of employees. This would have the effect of keeping their list of employees shorter, allowing some small businesses to fall underneath the 50 full-time employees line that would require them to provide their employees with healthcare under the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. This change is seen by supporters as a way to incentivize small businesses to hire more veterans. |
1965_1 | Rodney L. Davis of Illinois' 13th congressional district introduced the bill into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress, on November 13, 2013. The bill passed into the House on March 11, 2014. The United States Senate began working on the bill in May 2014, when it decided to amend the bill so that it could serve as the legislative vehicle for the EXPIRE Act. The EXPIRE Act would extend a variety of tax credits that expired at the end of 2013.
Background
Roughly 8 million veterans received health coverage through the Veterans Administration in 2013.
Over 50 different tax breaks, in addition to the Research & Experimentation Tax Credit, expired at the end of 2013.
Provisions of the bill
Provisions of the Hire More Heroes Act of 2013
This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Research Service, a public domain source. |
1965_2 | The Hire More Heroes Act of 2013 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to permit an employer, for purposes of determining whether such employer is an applicable large employer and thus required to provide health care coverage to its employees under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, to exclude employees who have coverage under a health care program administered by the United States Department of Defense (DOD), including TRICARE, or the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
Provisions of the EXPIRE Act
The EXPIRE Act would cost $85 billion. It would extend a variety of tax credits and tax relief measures, including the research and development tax credit. It also includes provisions providing incentives for the wind industry. |
1965_3 | Procedural history
The Hire More Heroes Act of 2013 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on November 13, 2013 by Rep. Rodney Davis (R, IL-13). It was referred to the United States House Committee on Ways and Means. On March 7, 2014, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor announced that H.R. 3474 would be considered under a suspension of the rules on March 11, 2014. The House voted on March 11, 2014 to pass the bill in Roll Call Vote 115 by a vote of 406-1. |
1965_4 | On May 13, 2014, the United States Senate voted in Recorded Vote 143 to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3474, passing the motion 96-3. This meant that the Senate agreed to move on to considering H.R. 3474 as their next action, which they were expected to consider for a week. Instead of addressing the question of excluding veterans from the count of employees under the Affordable Care Act, the Senate was expected to amend the bill so that it could serve as the legislative vehicle for the EXPIRE Act. The EXPIRE Act would be easier for the House to pass if the Senate sends it to that chamber as an amendment to a House-passed bill instead of a newly arrived Senate bill.
Debate and discussion |
1965_5 | Debate over the Hire More Heroes Act of 2013
One of the bill's co-sponsors, Rep. Randy Hultgren (R-IL), wrote in favor of the bill saying that the employer health insurance mandate "is just another costly burden that discourages employers from expanding their workforce, and our economy cannot afford it. Lifting this burden on small businesses is a win for our veterans and our economy."
Rep. Davis, who introduced the bill said that the bill "gives our small businesses another incentive to hire veterans, which helps to address the increasing number of unemployed veterans, while providing them with some relief from ObamaCare."
Debate about the EXPIRE Act
The Club for Growth, a conservative group, objected to the legislation and called it a "special-interest orgy." Wind energy related tax provisions in the Senate bill would cost almost $13 billion and are opposed by some Republicans. |
1965_6 | On May 9, 2014, the House passed the American Research and Competitiveness Act of 2014 (H.R. 4438; 113th Congress), a bill that would make permanent the Research & Experimentation Tax Credit, a business tax credit for companies pursuing research and development projects in the United States. The credit was created in 1981, has been renewed multiple times, and recently expired. Since the Senate's EXPIRE Act has a similar provision to extend this tax credit, there is some hope that the two parties will be able to compromise about it. However, the major difference between the two is that the House is making some tax extenders permanent, while the Senate is still pushing for a variety of shorter extensions, as has been traditionally done.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said that the bill "will help countless Americans" and "bring American families and the economy a fair shot." |
1965_7 | Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), the Senate Finance Committee chairman, said that his "first choice" would be to pass tax reform immediately, but that "the reality is that tax reform is not happening tomorrow. Reaching a bipartisan, comprehensive plan is going to take time and work."
Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) argued that "rather than blindly extending these provisions, what we ought to do is eliminate these wasteful extenders which are really just subsidies" such as the production tax credit. According to Flake, due to the United States' debt of $17.5 trillion, subsidies need to be eliminated.
See also
List of bills in the 113th United States Congress
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Veteran
Notes/References
External links
Library of Congress - Thomas H.R. 3474
beta.congress.gov H.R. 3474
GovTrack.us H.R. 3474
OpenCongress.org H.R. 3474
WashingtonWatch.com H.R. 3474 |
1965_8 | Proposed legislation of the 113th United States Congress
Legislation attempting to reform or repeal the Affordable Care Act |
1966_0 | Celebrity is the fourth and final studio album by American boy band NSYNC. It was released by Jive Records on July 24, 2001. Due to constant criticism that they were not a "credible group", NSYNC began experimenting with genres such as hip hop and two-step. As with their previous studio album, No Strings Attached (2000), numerous producers, including BT, Rodney Jerkins, Brian McKnight, PAJAM, and the Neptunes, worked on the album. Justin Timberlake and JC Chasez also contributed to production, while they co-wrote 10 of 13 tracks in an attempt to develop a unique sound, which includes pop, R&B, teen pop, and urban genres. |
1966_1 | After being delayed by unfinished recording sessions, Celebrity was released to generally favorable reviews from music critics, many of whom praised the production and songwriting. The album was the band's second album to debut at number one on the US Billboard 200 chart, with first week sales of 1,879,495 copies in the US, which became the second-best debut week sales in the country. It was also the third-best selling album on the Billboard 200 in 2001, after Shaggy's Hot Shot (2000) and Linkin Park's Hybrid Theory (2000), and has since been certified quintuple platinum in the US by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). NSYNC embarked on the accompanying PopOdyssey and Celebrity tours for promotion.
Background and development |
1966_2 | At the 2000 Billboard Music Awards on December 5, NSYNC announced they would begin "experimenting with new music" for their third studio album at a recording studio in Florida during January and February 2001. Justin Timberlake said the band planned to spend two months in the studio to come up with ideas, while Joey Fatone stated that they may leave Florida as the album progresses. NSYNC also said they wanted to collaborate with Kevin "She'kspere" Briggs and Richard Marx, with whom they had worked on their second studio album No Strings Attached (2000). |
1966_3 | Although No Strings Attached sold 14 million copies worldwide, including a record 2.4 million in the United States during its first week, critics ridiculed the band, who did not match the critics' perceptions as a "credible group" and were not considered "artistic". In response to this, NSYNC decided to be more involved in production, co-writing 10 of the 13 tracks on Celebrity. JC Chasez discussed the recording process in an interview with Billboard: "Our objective was not to be self-conscious and try to make another hit record. Instead, we set out to make a record that was more reflective of what turns us on musically. We also wanted to prove that pop music comes in a lot of different flavors. It's not all bubble-gum." The band decided to assign roles for each member to combat media perception of "leadership roles within the group". Timberlake and Chasez worked on the album's production and music, while Lance Bass was assigned to handle business and management, and Fatone started to |
1966_4 | plan the supporting tour alongside Chris Kirkpatrick. Celebrity finished production in June 2001. |
1966_5 | Recording and production
NSYNC sought out several collaborators to add new styles to their sound for Celebrity. BT was recruited when Chasez, a fan of BT's music, befriended the producer at shows. Though initially hesitant to work with the band as their styles were opposite from each other, BT finally agreed when Timberlake told him he could do whatever he wanted with the group's vocals. Timberlake told BT he wanted the track to sound like "The Hip Hop Phenomenon" on the UK version of BT's 1999 album Movement in Still Life, to which BT responded, "If you wanna do something that punk-rock, I'll do it." During the production of "Pop", BT tried 40 different treatments for vocals, with him using equipment that is commonly used for movie sound effects, and he constantly shouted Michael Jackson's name at Timberlake to inspire him. BT changed the song from "new-school R&B, Timbaland-style beats, to progressive house". |
1966_6 | NSYNC choreographer Wade Robson also took on a bigger role for the band as he co-wrote and produced multiple tracks for Celebrity, including "Pop", "Gone", and the title track. "Gone" was initially written as a duet between Timberlake and Jackson, but was declined by the latter of the two. Timberlake took the song to NSYNC's A&R team and the band later recorded it. Jackson changed his mind after the song's release and wanted it to be performed only as a duet between himself and Timberlake, but they could not find a way to rewrite the song. American production duo the Neptunes became engaged to produce Celebritys third single "Girlfriend". Timberlake was determined to get American musician Stevie Wonder to play the harmonica for "Something Like You" after Timberlake composed the song with his songwriting partner Robin Wiley. Wonder recorded the harmonica part after Jive Records contacted him, with Timberlake describing his presence as a "surreal moment". Brad Daymond and Alex Greggs, |
1966_7 | known as Riprock 'n' Alex G, returned from No Strings Attached to write and produce three tracks: "The Two of Us", "Up Against the Wall", and "The Game is Over". Bass stated that "The Two of Us" was inspired by the music of Craig David. |
1966_8 | Composition and lyrical content
Celebrity includes elements of several musical genres, including pop, R&B, teen pop, and urban. In contrast to No Strings Attached, the decision to experiment with different sounds on songs such as "Pop" was made so NSYNC could appear more mature and musically diverse. The album fuses sounds from NSYNC's earlier songs such as "Bye Bye Bye" (2000) with experimental genres, including hip hop and British two-step. Several of the producers who worked on Celebrity influenced the unique sound of each track, which was attributed to the band's self-awareness and desire to accentuate different aspects of their music. |
1966_9 | The album's first track, "Pop", refers to NSYNC's defense of the pop genre towards their critics. Larry Flick of Billboard described the song as "a crafty, anthemic blend of Cameo-style electro-funk beats, Euro-pop synths, heavy-metal guitars, and Timberlake's now-signature human beat-box riffs", while John Hugar of Uproxx referred to it as "a sort of proto-salvo against in the rockist vs. poptimists argument", and called the song a preview of Timberlake's 2003 single "Rock Your Body". The next track, "Celebrity", was produced by Rodney Jerkins, who used "low-key, funksome, two-step slither" along with camera clicks. The lyrics outline the negative consequences of being "a multi-millionaire, globe-trotting pop star", while Jon O'Brien of Billboard noted that the song is influenced by the Blackstreet and Janet Jackson song "Girlfriend/Boyfriend" (1999). "The Game is Over", according to Barry Walters of Rolling Stone, includes the "Pac-Man theme and dance-y squeaks", and "echoes the |
1966_10 | sounds and sentiments of the last album's edgiest cuts". The fourth track, "Girlfriend", is an R&B song that was produced by the Neptunes. A remix of the track that features rapper Nelly was noted for giving the song a hip hop influence. Nelly raps over a minimal guitar figure for two verses; the first which lasted for 61 seconds before the song's first verse. "The Two of Us" is an "R&B waltz" containing a "British dancefloor beat", which was compared to that of "Digital Get Down" from No Strings Attached. Staff writers at Billboard considered the ballad "Gone" to be "harrowing, relentless and unmistakably final". Hugar noted "Gone" as the precursor to Timberlake's second single "Cry Me a River" (2002). |
1966_11 | "Tell Me, Tell Me... Baby" was written by Max Martin and includes elements of Europop. According to O'Brien, the song contains "larger than life beats, swelling strings" and a bombastic chorus, which serves as a "blatant throwback". "Up Against the Wall" is an R&B song that features two-step garage elements; it was compared to Billy Joel's song "Get It Right the First Time" from his 1977 album The Stranger, while the middle eight was compared to songs by the UK garage group So Solid Crew. "See Right Through You", the ninth track on Celebrity, has an R&B sound; according to David Browne of Entertainment Weekly, the song is "another tale of betrayal by scheming girls". The Brian McKnight-produced track "Selfish" combines the vocals of Chasez and Timberlake with an adult contemporary track. "Just Don't Tell Me That", a teen pop track, is similar to songs by Britney Spears and the Backstreet Boys. The song's lyrics describe a "fame-seeking girlfriend" spending too much time at the |
1966_12 | Playboy Mansion. According to Browne, "Something Like You" is a "squishy ballad with drooling-puppy harmonies and lyrics". The chorus was compared to the Boyz II Men song "4 Seasons of Loneliness". The US version of the album's final song "Do Your Thing" contains "stuttering electronic beats" and a bar by the songwriter J. Moss. Browne described the song as "mild electronica"; "Do Your Thing" is included on Celebrity because Jive Records wanted a song that showcased NSYNC's vocal talents and harmony. |
1966_13 | Artwork and title
The artwork of Celebrity depicts the band walking on a red carpet while surrounded by flashing cameras and a crowd. Jackie Murphy created the artwork, which was photographed by Mark Seliger. Writing for AllMusic, Stephen Thomas Erlewine considered the garish cover art to be a hybrid of the cover of the Beatles' 1967 album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and music videos by alternative rock band Sammy, and said the title Celebrity "none too subtly [draws] attention to the fact that they're stars". Ariana Bacle of Entertainment Weekly stated the appearance of each member on the artwork is "tame" in comparison to that of NSYNC's 1997 self-titled debut studio album, specifically criticizing Chasez and Joey Fatone's highlights for seeking unneeded attention.
Release and promotion |
1966_14 | The album was officially announced on April 2, 2001 as Celebrity, with Jive Records having intentions to release an "uptempo" first single later that month. On May 11, 2001, MTV played a recording of "Pop" via satellite during NSYNC's tour rehearsal for PopOdyssey, leading to the song's release to radio stations as the album's lead single three days later. Celebrity was initially set to be released on June 26, 2001, with the opening date of PopOdyssey on May 12, 2001. The tour was postponed to May 18, 2001, because the staging was still in development, and the album's release date was postponed to July 24, 2001. NSYNC decided to perform the tracks from Celebrity on tour before its release. The tour was sponsored by Verizon, which launched several television and radio advertising campaigns across the US in promotion of the album and its release date. In an interview with Billboard, Chasez stated the concept of playing new songs at a concert was unusual but he felt it was a good sign |
1966_15 | that the crowd was actively participating. Jive Records president Barry Weiss was surprised by the band's touring approach, acknowledging the audience response would indicate "an album of immeasurable creative and commercial depth". |
1966_16 | MTV broadcast a television special entitled The Road to Celebrity on July 21 and 22, 2001. The premiere of Celebrity, which included celebrities such as Britney Spears, Hugh Hefner, the Olsen Twins, and Aisha Tyler, was held at West Hollywood on July 23, 2001. NSYNC also played several songs at a tailgate party in the parking lot and appeared on MTV's Total Request Live on July 24, 2001, coinciding with the date of the album's ultimate release. To promote Celebrity, NSYNC appeared on The Rosie O'Donnell Show, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and Today, between June and August 2001. On the August 2001 magazine issue of Rolling Stone, each NSYNC member was featured on an individual cover, in addition to a cover with the whole group. The recording process and promotional cycle for Celebrity was more condensed than previous albums, as the group scrambled to finish the album while planning for PopOdyssey. Chasez stated that the process of recording, promoting and touring was "everything at |
1966_17 | once". |
1966_18 | Tours
NSYNC embarked on two concert tours to promote the album. The first was PopOdyssey, which began on May 23, 2001, in Jacksonville, Florida, and concluded on September 1, 2001, in Mexico City. The tour's set was a five-story-high main stage with several smaller stages surrounding it, with the setup being transported by 88 trucks in comparison to the 19 trucks used for their No Strings Attached Tour (2000). Earning over $90 million, PopOdyssey was the second biggest tour of 2001. The band's second tour for Celebrity was the Celebrity Tour, which began on March 3, 2002, in Portland, Oregon, and concluded on April 28, 2002, in Orlando, Florida. In contrast to PopOdyssey, the tour favored music over spectacle and incorporated their older songs with new arrangements. It earned $33 million.
Critical reception |
1966_19 | Celebrity was met with generally favorable reviews from music critics. At Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, the album received an average score of 65 based on 11 reviews, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. |
1966_20 | Erlewine said Celebrity is NSYNC's "most varied album yet" and called it a highlight from the teen-pop era of 1999–2001, and praised the musicianship of Timberlake, Chasez, and the songwriters. J.D. Considine of Blender said the album "shines brightest when the group matures enough to forget about its image and focus on the tunes". Alex Needham of NME wrote that although NSYNC display feelings of discontent on Celebrity, they "have the tunes to make up for it". In one of his "Consumer Guide" reviews, Robert Christgau gave the album a one-star honorable mention, writing, "they survive writing their own songs", highlighting "Selfish" and "Do Your Thing". Neil Strauss of The New York Times singled out "The Game Is Over," with its "skittering, robotic video-game beat" as an impressive track. |
1966_21 | Browne stated that Celebrity is "the consummate teen-pop experience", listing R&B, ballads, self-expression and Europop as examples of genres included. He also said it is "pleasant filler and nothing more". Walters said the anxiety in the singers' vocals allowed them to "pave a new high road for teen pop’s future", and that he found the band's calling out of "anonymous gold diggers" on several tracks tiresome. Writing for Slant, Sal Cinquemani criticized the album for being "slightly overcooked and a tad overzealous", saying it is unfortunate NSYNC "couldn’t completely discard the classic hit-making formula in favor of the more experimental pop that seems so inherent in this and their last album". He said NSYNC could become "The Beatles of their generation" if they abandoned the pop genre and survived the growing pains and the aging of their fans. The staff of Q said Celebrity is "quality froth" despite not being good, and the staff from E! Online stated that 13-year-old girls would |
1966_22 | love the album while others will only reluctantly appreciate it. |
1966_23 | Dotmusic's Cyd Jaymes was critical of Celebrity, praising the first track "Pop" for being one of the best singles of 2001, but describing the remainder of the album as "formulaic, less-than-meaty balladeering and the odd glimmer of upbeat hope", and largely underwhelming. Jason Thompson of PopMatters described it as "threadbare cookie crunch" and accused the band of setting double-standards for their fans, saying NSYNC "enjoy flaunting their own image while at the same time playing a candy-ass game of 'don't like us only for our status'". |
1966_24 | Commercial performance |
1966_25 | In the US, Celebrity debuted at number one on the Billboard 200. Although it did not sell as many copies as No Strings Attached, Celebrity, selling 1,879,955 copies, had the second-best debut week sales at the time since Nielsen SoundScan had begun monitoring record retailers in 1991. Billboard said the album's failure to match the first-week sales of its predecessor was due to the 2001 US economy's weaker state in comparison with the previous year, as well as the first decline in album sales in more than a decade. On August 22, 2001, Celebrity was certified quintuple platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), denoting shipments of 5,000,000 units in the US. It became the third best-selling album of 2001, selling 4.42 million copies. Sales of the album were marginally lower than those of Shaggy's Hot Shot by 86,000 copies, which only beat it in the cassette format; Hot Shot sold 304,000 tapes while Celebrity only sold 92,000 tapes. Celebrity was ranked at number |
1966_26 | nine on the Billboard 200 year-end chart for 2001. As of March 2015, the album had sold 5,002,000 copies in the US according to Nielsen Music. It has sold an additional 826,000 units at the BMG Music Club, as of February 2003. |
1966_27 | Celebrity debuted at number one in Canada on the Canadian Albums Chart, selling 71,254 copies, which was the biggest first-week album sales of 2001. It was certified double platinum by Music Canada (MC) for selling over 200,000 units in the country on November 7, 2001. In the United Kingdom, the album sold 13,000 units in its debut week, entering at number 12 on the UK Albums Chart. Celebrity was certified gold by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) for selling over 100,000 copies in the UK on May 17, 2002. Several European companies reported slow album sales, including Fnac in France and Spain, WOM in Germany, and Ricordi in Italy. The album sold 20,000 units in the first week in Japan, where it peaked at number 11 on the Oricon Albums Chart. Celebrity peaked at number 10 on Australia's ARIA Albums chart, and was certified gold by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) for selling over 35,000 units in the country. |
1966_28 | Legacy
At the end of the Celebrity Tour in May 2002, NSYNC went on hiatus to take time off from touring and recording and to accommodate for Timberlake's desire to record a solo album. Although the hiatus was originally planned to be temporary with the band intending on recording a fourth album once Timberlake released the album, they never returned to record together in the studio. |
1966_29 | Celebrity is retrospectively seen as "a logical swan song" for NSYNC because it came after the record-breaking commercial success of No Strings Attached and before the band's eventual dissolution. Music critics observed that the album was the basis for Timberlake's solo career, as the album's singles consisted of only songs Timberlake co-wrote, in addition to album promotion that centered around Timberlake. Hugar compared Celebrity to Zayn Malik's and Harry Styles' desires for solo stardom after One Direction's hiatus, concluding that it is "a reminder that boy bands are rarely built to last". NPR's Maria Sherman stated the album shifted the band further towards the R&B genre and "firmly established Timberlake as the bandleader and pushed Chasez's powerful pop vocals to the periphery". Andrew Unterberger of Billboard acknowledged that Celebrity contained sounds which "pushes pop music into the future". |
1966_30 | Track listing
Track listing and credits adapted from the album's liner notes. All lead vocals provided by Justin Timberlake and JC Chasez.
Personnel
All credits taken from AllMusic.
NSYNC
Lance Bass background vocals
JC Chasez lead vocals, producer
Joey Fatone background vocals
Chris Kirkpatrick background vocals
Justin Timberlake lead vocals, arranger, multi instruments, producer, beatbox
Instrumentation
Kenny Blank guitar
Bryan Popin piano, cello, strings
Richard Fortus bass guitar, electric guitar
Hampton String Quartet strings
Michael Landau electric guitar
Michael Lang piano
Michael Hart Thompson acoustic guitar
Anthony Nance drum programming
Esbjörn Öhrwall guitar
WaWa chant
Stevie Wonder harmonica
Yasu string engineer |
1966_31 | Production
BT arranger, programming, producer, engineer, mixing
Rodney Jerkins multi instruments, producer
Kristian Lundin producer, engineer, mixing
Brian McKnight keyboards, producer
James Moss producer, engineer, rap, mixing
J. Valentine background vocals, writer, producer
Rami producer, engineer, mixing
Wade Robson arranger, multi instruments, producer
Jake Schulze producer, engineer, mixing
Robin Wiley producer, digital editing, string arrangements |
1966_32 | Technical
Alan Armitage engineer
Brady Barnett digital editing
Stuart Brawley engineer, mixing
Christopher Carroll mixing
Bradley Daymond mixing
Todd Fairall engineer
Tony Flores mixing
Michael Forbes engineer
Brian Garten engineer
Alexander Greggs mixing
Paul Gregory engineer
Kevin Guarnieri engineer, digital editing, assistant engineer
Chris Haggerty digital editing
Chaz Harper mastering
Jean-Marie Horvat mixing
Bill Importico engineer
Joel Kazmi engineer, assistant vocal engineer
Scott Kieklak mixing
Peter Mokran mixing
Dylan Koski-Budabin engineer
Pablo Munguia engineer, assistant engineer
Paulino Oliveira assistant engineer
John O'Mahoney mixing
Charles Pollard programming, engineer, string arrangements
Talley Sherwood engineer
Mary Ann Souza assistant engineer
Rich Tapper assistant engineer, mixing
Jim Tobin FOH Manager
Michael Tucker engineer, assistant engineer, mixing, vocal recording
Carlos Vazquez beat programming
Chris Wood engineer |
1966_33 | Other
Steven Gerstein stylist
Jackie Murphy art direction, design
Frankie Payne hair stylist
Mark Seliger photography
Charts
Weekly charts
Year-end charts
Decade-end charts
Certifications
Release history
See also
List of 2001 albums
List of Billboard 200 number-one albums of 2001
List of fastest-selling albums worldwide
Notes
References
2001 albums
NSYNC albums
Jive Records albums
Albums recorded at Metalworks Studios
Albums recorded at Record Plant (Los Angeles)
Albums recorded at Westlake Recording Studios
Albums produced by Rodney Jerkins
Albums produced by Kristian Lundin
Albums produced by Brian McKnight
Albums produced by the Neptunes
Albums produced by Rami Yacoub
Albums produced by Justin Timberlake |
1967_0 | Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan () is a Teochew clan association in Singapore. Poit Ip, which means eight districts in the Teochew dialect, stood for the eight Teochew districts in the province of Guangdong, China. Huay Kuan means "clan association". On 12 December 1928, a temporary committee convened a meeting at the Tuan Mong School in preparation of the formation of the Huay Kuan. On 20 March 1929, British colonial authorities exempted the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan from registration, and it was formally established.
History
One of the first few Teochew clan associations established in Singapore was the Ngee Ann Kongsi. It was founded in 1845 by Seah Eu Chin together with 12 clans from Chenghai and Haiyang. |
1967_1 | Over time, it appeared that the Kongsi was dominated by the Seah family and the descendants of the 12 clans. On 28 December 1927, 14 men wrote to Ngee Ann Kongsi's chairman, Seah Eng Tong () to voice out discontent with the Kongsi. The 14 men led by Lim Nee Soon included other prominent Teochew figures such as Ang Kai Pang (), Chia Soon Kim (), Lim Woo Ngam (), Ng Khern Seng (), Teo Keong Meng (), Yeo Chan Boon () and Yeo Swee Huang (). They felt that the Kongsi had strayed from its founding objectives and did not act as a good representative of the Teochew community. |
1967_2 | In order to be in line with the Kongsi's original aims, they demanded the Kongsi to be handed over to the Teochew community. A series of negotiations over the Kongsi carried on for the next eight to nine months, but failed to conclude with an acceptable solution for both parties. Lim Nee Soon saw the need of an organisation that could represent the Teochews, therefore on 9 September 1928, Lim Nee Soon led a group of 40 Teochew community leaders to publish a proposal to form a Teochew Huay Kuan (Huay Kuan means Clan Association). |
1967_3 | On 15 September 1928, a Teochew community-wide general meeting was held at the Chinese Chamber of Commerce. The purpose of the meeting was to deliberate over the founding of a Teochew Association. It was agreed that the association would be called the Singapore Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan. Poit Ip, which means eight districts in Teochew dialect, stood for the 8 Teochew districts in the province of Guangdong, China. The eight districts were Chaoan, Chenghai, Chaoyang, Jieyang, Raoping, Puning, Huilai and Nanao. A 12-member temporary committee including Lim Nee Soon, Lee Wee Nam, Huang Wei Ting (), Lim Woo Ngam and Yeo Chan Boon was formed. It was also established that each district would nominate 2 representatives to serve on the committee. On 12 December 1928 the temporary committee convened a meeting at the Tuan Mong School in preparation of the formation of the Huay Kuan. Eight committee members including Lim Nee Soon and Lee Wee Nam were then tasked to draft the constitution. |
1967_4 | On 26 January 1929, a Teochew general meeting was held in the Chinese Chamber of Commerce. It was resolved that a properties management committee, called the Teochew (Eight Districts) Public Property Preservation Association, be organised by the Teochew clansmen from the eight districts. This committee would be dissolved upon the establishment of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan that would manage all the properties. This temporary office was also housed at the Tuan Mong School. The temporary association had 48 members including the following office bearers, President: Lim Nee Soon, Vice-President: Lee Wee Nam and Treasurers: Tan Chew Char and Low Peng Soy. |
1967_5 | On 20 March 1929, the British colonial authorities exempted the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan from registration and it was formally established. A recruitment drive was launched in April 1929 and it attracted more than 700 members. In August 1929, the very first Management Committee was elected. The Management Committee included the following office bearers, President: Lim Nee Soon, Vice-President: Lee Wee Nam and Yeo Chang Boon, Treasurer: Tan Lip Sek and Secretary: Lim Woo Ngam. Upon the independence of Singapore on 9 August 1965, the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan applied for registration as required by the authorities and its approval was granted on 9 November 1965.
On 4 September 1929, the 25 members of the first council were sworn in. Notable member includes Lim Nee Soon |
1967_6 | Lim Nee Soon, Lee Wee Nam, Yeo Chan Boon and four others were then tasked to negotiate with the Ngee Ann Kong Si regarding the Teochew's public properties. A meeting was convened between Seah Eu Tong and Lim Nee Soon on 12 April 1930 to deliberate over the future of Ngee Ann Kong Si. After the meeting, a new Management Committee of 25 members for the Ngee Ann Kong Si was formed. The Ngee Ann Kong Si was officially incorporated on 25 February 1933 under the Ngee Ann Kongsi (Incorporation). The Ngee Ann Kong Si essentially became a trustee's organisation for the Teochew community. With the completion of the Teochew Building (at no.97 Tank Road) in 1963, Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and the Ngee Ann Kong Si moved their offices into those premises. |
1967_7 | Today the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan deals largely with promotion of Teochew cultural values while the Ngee Ann Kong Si acts as a charity organisation and business arm of the Teochew community. Ngee Ann Kong Si contributes a substantial amount of their net annual income towards Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan to finance the welfare aid of its needy members and the clan's activities. These two organisations exist in close relation and often engage in joint activities. For instance, when Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan organised its annual Teochew Week Exhibition or The Teochew International Convention in 2003, Ngee Ann Kong Si acted as their sponsor. The Teochew Funeral Parlour in Hougang was jointly built and maintained by Ngee Ann Kong Si and Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan. |
1967_8 | Membership
Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan has grown to be one of the largest Chinese clan associations in Singapore. In 1963, it widened its membership base to include female members As of 2008, its membership strength stood at over 7000 members from a total of 520,000 Teochews in Singapore. Its members are not required to pay annual membership fees; only a one-time registration fee is required. It restricts membership to Teochews only.
In 2008, it had six Singapore ministers forming its honorary advisory board. They were Lim Boon Heng (Minister, Prime Minister Office), George Yeo Yong Boon (Minister for Foreign Affairs), Lee Boon Yang (Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts), Teo Chee Hean (Minister for Defence), Lim Swee Say (Minister, Prime Minister Office) and Lim Hng Kiang (Minister for Trade and Industry).
Numerous well known businesspeople and entrepreneurs have been members or maintained close relationship with the association. |
1967_9 | Activities
The Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan has been involved in various activities over the years. The cultural, welfare and charity activities and providing an economic function are some of its areas it has been engaged in.
Cultural activities |
1967_10 | Every Lunar New Year it holds a mass greeting party. At the Mid Autumn Festival, a party is held with Teochew mooncakes and Teochew "Kongfu" tea and Teochew opera. Since 1992, Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan has held several Teochew Week on themes like Teochew history, folklores and culture, Teochew food and songs etc. It also held a series of talks on Chinese folklores, Chinese migration history and introduction to opera performance. It conducted cultural activities such as workshop on Chinese dance, martial arts, Chinese painting and calligraphy competition. These classes are often free or subsidised and open to public. It also takes part in the annual Singapore Chinggay parade which involves a parade of dance and mobile floats. It organises an annual Teochew art exhibition and holds performances by the associations' teenage and children's drama groups, young people's drama group and male chorus. In October 2002, it organised a six-month joint exhibition with the Singapore History Museum |
1967_11 | on Singapore Teochew's history and culture. |
1967_12 | Welfare and charity provision |
1967_13 | Welfare was also an important function of the Singapore Chinese associations in the 19th and early 20th century. These welfare needs can be met in the form of charity funds and in the past it was not unusual to provide these assistances beyond the shores of Singapore. In 1936, the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan raised a total of $15,413 for the purpose of strengthening a dyke in Chaozhou. It also set up a Relief Fund Committee of the Teochew Pang (association). By 1940, the Teochew community raised a total of $472,900 for its relief fund. Locally, the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan donated to foundations such as the Nanyang University Foundation, National Defence Foundation, Cultural Foundation and Chinese Development Assistance Council Foundation. The Ngee Ann Kong Si annually contributes a generous portion of their net income towards the welfare activities of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan. Currently, it also provides scholarships to both local and Chinese students.
Economic function |
1967_14 | Although the economic and business purposes of the Chinese clan associations are never explicitly spelt out, by its nature and existence of a network, it provides opportunities for businessmen to conduct business. Tan Koh Tiang, current administration secretary of the present Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan, states that the Teochew International Convention, which is held every two years, not only links up with the other Teochew clans all over the world to share cultural and clan issues, but it also serves to promote economic development and links. In 1993, it conducted a seminar on investment opportunities in Chao-zhou and Guangdong provinces. It also provided contacts and information service for businessmen who wish to venture into China. It also offered trips to China to seek investment potential. Commenting on the seminar, Dr Phua Kok Khoo of the Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan stated that its "main emphasis is still on promoting Chinese culture, and even if (they) discuss business, it will |
1967_15 | not be at the expense of cultural activities". |
1967_16 | Demise of Chinese Clans and present challenges
Chinese clan associations faced a period of stagnation and decline which began around the period of post independence of Singapore. After Singapore gained independence, community centres were established by the People's Association to promote communal activities for people in Singapore. Successful public housing policies also made the people less inclined to approach the clan associations for assistance on housing issues. Further, educational and health facilities were established to meet the needs of Singapore citizens. Employment issues were greatly reduced by the country's industrialisation projects. These factors led to the decline of Chinese clan associations as pointed out by BG Lee Hsien Loong in one of his speeches,"since Independence, many of the services the clan used to provide have been taken over by government and other civic organizations…the government took over the running of schools and public services. |
1967_17 | Chinese clan associations started to lose their appeal and purpose towards the community and thus they experienced a dwindling membership".
With the decline of Chinese clan associations, Teochew Poit Ip Huay Kuan and other clans increasingly faced obstacles in sustaining their survival. It is a common perception among the Singaporean youths that Chinese clan associations are old-fashioned concepts and thus they lack interest in participating in the clan's activities. This worry over the youths' perception is implied by the former Chairman of Chongshan Huay Kuan, Leong Ah Soh, 59 years old, who told the Straits Times on 13 February 1998, that "even though clan leaders want to re-fashion clans to attract the young, there is great resistance from the ground". |
1967_18 | The language divide between the Chinese-speaking general population of the Chinese clan associations and the English-speaking younger generation also acts as an obstacle to getting youth to be engaged in activities. In a report by the Straits Times on 13 February 1998, it cited that many people gave the Chinese cultural festival's events a cold shoulder due to their inability to understand or speak Mandarin. The decrease in importance of the Chinese language can be attributed how youths often view Chinese as inferior. According to Professor Chew Cheng Hai, a consultant to Nanyang Technological University's Centre for Chinese Language and Culture, "Singaporean society views Mandarin as the language of those who are not successful." |